Back

Diagnostic performance of CT and its key signs for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Li, K.; Wu, X.; Zhong, Y.; Qin, W.; Zhang, Z.

2020-05-26 radiology and imaging
10.1101/2020.05.24.20111773
Show abstract

PurposeTo evaluate the diagnostic value of chest CT in 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), using the reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) as a reference standard. At the same time, the imaging features of CT in confirmed COVID-19 patients would be summarized. MethodsA comprehensive literature search of 5 electronic databases was performed. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated using the random-effects model and the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve. We also conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the pooled incidence of the chest CT imaging findings and the 95% confidence interval (95%CI). Meta-regression analysis was used to explore the source of heterogeneity. ResultsOverall, 25 articles comprising 4,857 patients were included. The pooled sensitivity of CT was 93% (95% CI, 89-96%) and specificity was 44% (95% CI, 27-62%). The area under the SROC curve was 0.94 (95% CI, 0.91-0.96). For the RT-PCR assay, the pooled sensitivity of the initial test and the missed diagnosis rate after the second-round test were 76% (95% CI: 59-89%; I2=96%) and 26% (95% CI: 14-39%; I2=45%), respectively. According to the subgroup analysis, the diagnostic sensitivity of CT in Hubei was higher than that in other regions. Besides, the most common patterns on CT imaging finding was ground glass opacities (GGO) 58% (95% CI: 49-70%), followed by air bronchogram 51% (95% CI: 31-70%). Lesions were inclined to distribute in peripheral 64% (95% CI: 49-78%), and the incidence of bilateral lung involvement was 69% (95% CI: 58-79%). ConclusionsThere were still several cases of missed diagnosis after multiple RT-PCR examinations. In high-prevalence areas, CT could be recommended as an auxiliary screening method for RT-PCR. Key pointsO_LITaking RT-PCR as the reference standard, the pooled sensitivity of CT was 93% (95% CI, 89-96%) and the specificity was 44% (95% CI, 27-62%). The area under the SROC curve was 0.94 (95% CI, 0.91-0.96). C_LIO_LIFor the RT-PCR assay, the pooled sensitivity of the initial test and the missed diagnosis rate after the second-round test were 76% (95% CI: 59-89%) and 26% (95% CI: 14-39%), respectively. C_LIO_LIGGO was the key sign of the CT imaging, with an incidence of 58% (95% CI: 49-70%) in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Pneumonia lesions were inclined to distribute in peripheral 64% (95% CI: 49-78%) and bilateral 69% (95% CI: 58-79%) lung lobes. C_LI

Matching journals

1
PLOS ONE
Public Library of Science (PLoS) · based on 1737 published papers
Top 23%
17.9%
2
Annals of Translational Medicine
AME Publishing Company · based on 14 published papers
#1
91× avg
3
European Radiology
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 11 published papers
Top 0.2%
86× avg
4
Scientific Reports
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 701 published papers
Top 14%
2.2× avg
5
Diagnostics
MDPI AG · based on 36 published papers
Top 0.1%
39× avg
6
Medicine
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) · based on 29 published papers
Top 2%
9.4× avg
7
Heliyon
Elsevier BV · based on 57 published papers
Top 4%
5.2× avg
8
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Wiley · based on 10 published papers
Top 1%
22× avg
9
Journal of Clinical Medicine
MDPI AG · based on 77 published papers
Top 11%
2.4× avg
10
BMJ Open
BMJ · based on 553 published papers
Top 43%
1.4%
11
Epidemiology and Infection
Cambridge University Press (CUP) · based on 80 published papers
Top 8%
3.8× avg
12
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
Frontiers Media SA · based on 10 published papers
Top 0.6%
18× avg
13
BioMed Research International
Wiley · based on 11 published papers
Top 3%
8.4× avg
14
Nature Communications
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 483 published papers
Top 39%
0.8%
15
Frontiers in Oncology
Frontiers Media SA · based on 34 published papers
Top 5%
3.0× avg
16
Frontiers in Public Health
Frontiers Media SA · based on 135 published papers
Top 24%
0.8%
17
Cureus
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 64 published papers
Top 18%
0.7%
18
Cancers
MDPI AG · based on 57 published papers
Top 7%
0.7%
19
eBioMedicine
Elsevier BV · based on 82 published papers
Top 8%
2.9× avg
20
Frontiers in Medicine
Frontiers Media SA · based on 99 published papers
Top 20%
0.7%
21
The Lancet Digital Health
Elsevier BV · based on 25 published papers
Top 5%
3.8× avg